Even in the Old Testament the terms "nefesh" and "neshamah" translated as soul and spirit actually don't mean anything more than "life/vitality" and "breathing" respectively.
Same in Finnish with "henki" meaning breath, soul and spirit (spirit as in the spirit of the woods or the spirit of the sauna or something like that). I would imagine henki was used before christian influence on the Finnish language since we also have the word "sielu" which is a lot closer to words from the languages of the countries that effected Finland like many of the Germanic languages.
Chasidah *TheFineArtOfWalkingPoint Fried yeah like nefesh and neshomah mean a lot more than just their literal translations. people in a few hundred years may be confused about our usage of words based on their literal dictionary meaning. neglecting to take context and actual usage into consideration is a massive oversight in terms of understanding another language
"Breath" and "air" are always used in language to describe the soul, such as the Greek words "psyche" and "pneuma," Latin word "spiritus" and "anima," Sanskrit "atman" (cognate with "atmosphere"), etc.
In Norwegian we have the word hugleik. Now another word that ends with leik is kjærleik. Leik mens play. kjær means to like something or someone much, so kjærleik means love. Thus the word hugleik thought + play = fantasy, but in a sentence where the word Leik (play) comes before hug (thought) we are talking about someone "lost" in their own toughs. In Norwegian hug can mean thought and memory, but also wanting or being attracted to something or someone. So when you can't stop thinking about a particular person, this is something happening in your mind and not in your heart or soul. This quote I found on Wikipedia: "Vardøgr is a Norwegian word defined as ‘‘premonitory sound or sight of a person before he arrives’’. The word vardøger is probably from Old Norse varðhygi, consisting of the elements vǫrð, "guard, watchman" (akin to "warden") and hugr, "mind" or "soul". Originally, vardøger was considered a fylgja, a sort of guardian spirit.[2]" The Norwegian dictionary is substantially smaller then the English, but loads of our words have several meanings depending on the context.
And then there's _hygge_ this fuzzy warm feeling you can get when you're resting peacefully in yourself, often in community with people taking good care of each other.
Colorado is looking beautiful as ever, I get nostalgic seeing it. I was fortunate enough to live right next to the garden of the gods for about 8 months. You are a lucky man
It is odd to think about just how much a Platonic conception of a separable spirit has influenced Christianity so much. Perhaps there were Norse christians who stuck to their culture’s thoughts on the body/spirit.
It kind of depends on what you mean by separable, though. In traditional Christian thought, for instance, body and soul are not separate parts of a human being (not like a soul wearing a bodysuit), but more like different dimensions: like there's depth behind the surface of flesh and bone. In Christian thought, death is a tragedy since it rips apart the very essence of human nature: being body and soul - being multidimensional - surface and depth. Sure, it's a separation of body and soul, but in the same way as bodily losing all arms and legs: it's an injury. It's kind of comparable to how Dr. Crawford explained how the hugr/hugi (btw, a concept still existing in everyday speech in the Nordic languages) may be separable in exceptional circumstances. In traditional Christian thought, death is like a prevalent exceptional circumstance. The comfort in all this, for Christians, is that one day the body will get resurrected and reunited with the soul, and once again be fully human.
Very interesting and informative (as always). I wonder what the thought process of pre-christian Scandinavians and Germanics were in regards to cremation. We're they releasing the "self" from the bounds of the physical body? Or perhaps it was more for practical reasons versus esoteric reasons.
Old Scandinavians believed in reincarnation, but one can’t do that until the flesh of one is completely gone. Therefore you were cremated to speed up reincarnation. For the ones who were evil or bad got thrown in bogs, because the body would take forever to decompose, hence delaying reincarnation.
This makes me wonder about how they would have perceived, a sleep walker. Where the person’s mind is still sleeping, while the soul wanders and the autonomic system is still operating the body through auto pilot.
Love this. Made me think that they actually privileged the inner, mental life over the physical one. One thing which strikes me about the Judaea-Christian idea is that the physical life is the main one and the soul is a bit of a consolation prize. For the ancient Norse, maybe it was the other way around.
"Mind" and "Consciousness" are kind of secular weasel-words. They still convey the notion of a separate "soul" associated with (but not identical to) the body. These terms are basically a holdover of Platonism, which you can see from their etymology (via "psyche") and philosophical history. The old Norse, as I think Crawford was suggesting, had a notion of "thought" but it was linked to/identical with the person as a whole. It wasn't its own "domain". So I think they had a much more Aristotelian (monistic) than a Platonist (dualistic) view.
Consciousness just means your immediate awareness of yourself and your surroundings. This whole thing started in trying to define the self and specifically who the subject in the sentence "who are you" is. Body purists must just deny that 'they' exist at all. This all causes a lot of philosophical problems. If you believe in 'matter' and soul then you need to explain what each are and how they can interact. If you believe in only matter or that the body is the same as the soul then you need to seriously define what "self" means or simply deny it and explain how it is that matter can think. If you're an idealist who believes there is only spirit and ideas then you can easily dismiss these questions because matter does not exist.
Man, probably one of the most interesting videos I've seen from you Dr. What a strange concept to me, an American in 2020 (not even a Christian), that the body and soul are one. Truly appreciate your work in this field.
Great subject, but this is also confusing. The old Norse must have discovered that the entire bodies of warriors did not disappear after they died in battle. Perhaps they just didn't have specialized words to describe that you could go to valhal and leave the body behind.
@@Battleschnodder Ibn Fadlan was told by the Rus, "You Arabs are fools because you put the men you love most and the most noble among you in the earth, and the earth and the worms and the insects eat them. But we burn them in the fire in an instant, so that once and without delay they enter paradise... his lord, for love of him, has sent a wind that will bear him hence within the hour." Obviously most pagans didn't have the same exact sentiment if they did bury their dead, but it sounds like what you're suggesting.
Thank you for all the good knowledge Doc. I appreciate the benefit of your years of study. It is refreshing to hear the truths of history (as well as can be understood) instead of all the fluff and stereotypes of Hollywood. Thank you for making this knowledge free to those wise enough to seek it, please keep up the good work!
Hugr einn þat er býr hjarta nær einn er hann sér um sefa; This makes for a wonderful title page for my newest sketchbook, entitled "Growth" Also I just ordered The Wanderer's Hávamál. Looking forward to having it next to your Poetic Edda, and Saga of the Volsungs.
Since this is the case, I'd like to understand what I experience in the "paranormal" realm of things. I'm sensitive to things that we can't explain. I've heard things, interacted with them, and caught them on camera. If they aren't "spirits", then what can they be?
If they had the concept of the body still being in the grave while the person went to Valhalla (or whatever afterlife they were destined for) doesn't that imply a concept of the separation of body and mind? Surely they didn't think that the physical skeleton went to Valhalla and then just suddenly reappeared in the grave if someone opened it? Might they have imagined it sort of like a dream vision or drug induced vision where the body is in one place and the mind is sort of in another?
What I'm about to say may sound controversial to some but I find this a very interesting concept since the idea of the body and soul being separated is a Grego-Roman doctrine that crept into Cristianity during the 4th century. The old and new testament speak of death as being a state of unconsciousness untill a fiscal resurrection of the body. (Aparently not unlike in Norse legand, except the body will be perfect) I will provide some examples below if you are interested. Some churches, like Seventh Day Adventists, still believe in a fiscal resurrection of the body rather then an immortal soul going straight to heaven, hell, pergatory or roaming the earth. Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10 - The dead know nothing Psalm 115:17 - The dead don't prais God John 11:11 - Death is unconsciousness Mark 5:39 - Death is unconsciousness 1 Corinthians 15:51-54 - Fiscal Resurrection of the body.
It seems like this concept is even murky today in the West, where we have concepts for a spiritual soul and a mind separate from the body. We take great care of our dead bodies, return those of soldiers and travelers to their homes to be mourned, bury them with their possessions, and often return to cremation urns or grave sites to connect with that individual as if the corpse was still somehow that person. It just FEELS true. Christianity has had a variety of ideas about the connection, from completely separate to connected so strongly that autopsy on the body would bar a soul from entry into Heaven. It sounds like this concept may not be so literal as to think the original body physically goes to the afterlife, but that the spirit itself has a body renewed and refreshed. Just because the original bones are still in the ground, doesn't mean their spirit has to be incorporeal. It may just have sounded ridiculous to the Norse to have a concept like an incorporeal ghost that can walk through walls and float. Everyone has a body, so if it's someone, then it's obviously embodied.
Hugi and ego are similar words, now that you mention it. Latin does not usually express the pronoun specifically, but cogito ergo sum implies that the self that thinks is the essence of our existance. Perhaps Odin has a tripartite soul: himself named Odin, and the two ravens?
The detail you go in to is great. You mentioned that the pre-Christian texts simply state that “you” go to Valhalla etc. Is it not possible that they’ve understood that “you” are not the same as “this body”.
This could even imply that they believed their form was kept. A form which was no different from their form on Earth. Some were buried and others were burned, surely they understood that the physical body was destroyed.
No. You have to remember we have 3500 years worth of burial evidence for the people in and around Scandinavia, and none of them until the later import of Middle Eastern, far East, and Latin cultures in the 600s onwards do you starts seeing any sort of burial which suggest anything short of them sending people off into the ground with all their most important material possessions. These were a people, for thousands of years, where the idea that the voice in their heads, the desires in their meat, and the flesh of their bones, were not in any way separable from the animating breath that signified their lives. And even more telling, they treated the dead as still having some kind of living substance to them which exceeded death, going so far as to protect themselves from the dead who may wish to take back from the living what they had lost. And as Dr. Crawford was saying, he translated hugr as "you" mostly because that's his educated personal opinion. It's not the final opinion and not the only opinion, but a very good one. Hugr and Munni were more or less, "thought" and "memory." But they alo meant much more than that. Munn could mean memory, but could also mean "inspiration." But not inspiration as in, something suddenly occurs to you as one thought outside you body projected into it from elsewhere, but as a literal progression of fate, one step leading to the next. The idea of "the miraculous," is also alien to the Old Norse. Nothing happens without a preceding and proceeding action. Inspiration in this case is literally fate manifest and unfolding, then continuing. You memories are part of your fate, in essence, and that they are part of your body is also evident, though Othinn is said to fly over the world with Huginn and Munnin each day and night, and worries one may not return more than the other -- which is Othinn maybe intimating he fears the depression that too much knowledge may bring, having said in Havamal, "it's good to be wise, but not so wise, that you can't find a reason to smile." That suggests thought, memory, inspiration, and even emotional motivation are all wrapped up in these words, and all of them are physically part of your body -- and if your body is destroyed, so are your thoughts and memories and motivations. The idea that your voice, the voice you are reading this text in (if you read that way) is a physical part of your meat, was what they were trying to convey. And when the body dies, consciousness and memory were non-transferable. Proof of this is seen in Voluspa when Othinn has to bring a Spa (a kind of seeress) back from the dead in order to have a conversation where he interrogates her corpse -- and after being reanimated, only then is her mind open to him to speak and have a rather catty and sassy rebuke for waking her up. In a Christian or Eastern story, that story would involve a spiritual conjuring and seance, but here you see repeatedly in the Sagas, corpses being the ones you have to go to in order for a daughter to rebuke her father and take his sword to gain the rights to perform some legal act, or a man essentially haunting his wife's vagina by leaving his grave, physically walking to the door, having sex with her, and walking back through his grave to to return to the battlefield in the other world. The idea that animal bodies and human bodies were hung to dry and parts of them kept as fetish items, like horse penises and human skulls, and unrequited killings often revisited with the revanant corpse of the dead, also goes hand in hand with this, as well as grave desecration being part of rebuking old allegiances and insulting the families of a ruined people. Burial mounds and ship burials gilded to the nines for the rich, and for the poor, even they got their most important items sent with them (and holding onto them by the living was seen as a kind of cursed act,) is meant to suggest there is a unity and continuity between the body and intelligence that can oly ve broken by physically destroying a body. But, we also have no physical proof that the Norse had drums (other than mention of the Sami) and no mention of the Northern Lights (but we know even though the solar cycle recording in China was very tame in this period, they had to have seen them.) So grains of salt need to be thrown all over. And just because the concept never got written down and isn't apparent in physical evidence, doesn't mean someone somewhere had the thought occur to them that these things may be separate.
I find it interesting to see how the frame of mind of one person influences their translation or conception of something. Someone who has an atheist frame of thought will never see the same interpretation as someone who thinks otherwise. A good example, the warriors grave, where it was always assumed it was a man because the archeologists of that time could not even consider a woman in this role. We are all biased through our personal beliefs/nonbeliefs
Thank you very much. I think it is very interesting and you could ask, why did the greeks talked about the soul ( ψυχή ) and daimon ( δαίμων ) but the norse people didn't ? why was the soul separated from the body in ancient Greece but not in ancient Scandinavia ?
Personally I believe it is because the body is seen as an expression of the spirit. Being an expression and creation of it, it is also a part of you in entirety. As long as a body exists there is a portion of the spirit that is still attached to this reality not allowing you to progress further.
@@sk7625 from where did you get that? that is interesting. Anyways, I'm talking about daimon as described in Plato - The Feast, Aristotle - The Delta Book / The Soul as seem to describe a deity between man and god.
As someone who is about 75% Irish I feel a great kinship with theNorse because of their presence in Irealand/Scotland and England. (the other 25% is Scots Anglo. What I'd love to see is a seris lime this dealing with Anceint "celts" I realize it might be more difficult as there aren't the writting text. Yes we have the Hero cycle etc but the were all tranlated by monk and as such heavily Christianized.
Thanks for explaining “Hugi”. That is really helpful. Plus the book looks great!! I am a little confused about the rest of the video. The Norse appear to be animists and even had contact with the Sami, who were practicing shamanic spirit flight and maybe even spirit possession. Most Animistic cultures have an idea of multiple souls that have different jobs. It is hard to believe that the Norse could teach one another seidr without some idea of multiple souls.
@Chasidah *TheFineArtofWalking: - interesting. I am relating this to the idea of a wandering or sometimes people call it a “free soul”- one that can do spirit flight. Witches seem to be able to do this. Is this a part of the Jewish tradition?
@@anotherelvis We have Odin's body being asleep when he is travelling the world in animal shape. (I'm guessing that's where Game of Thrones got it from.)
@@jytte-hilden Thank you for the answer. I also found a video in which Mathias Nordvig describes Seidr and finnfarar. I don't know which words they use to descibe this experience th-cam.com/video/SE-n8NB67r8/w-d-xo.html
Hm. Lemme rant... The swedish word håg is derived from hugr, meaning something more equal to "will" in my opinion. It's the free thought, the lust for or the like/want of something. Maybe "free will" or simply "personality". Sound very like what we perceive as the "soul" nowdays, but I don't know if they thought so back then... Today "håg" is an old fashioned word and doesn't really have a place in modern language, except in "komma ihåg", meaning to "remember" or "keep in mind". Generally I think most people that even know the definition of the word would translate it to "mind" or "thought". Still seems more connected to the body and mind than something over wordly to me.... Intresting! Just me thinking out loud! ^_^
The word is almost never used in Danish, but apparently it also has several meanings in norwegian. These are related to : Mind, memory and lust. www.naob.no/ordbok/hu_2
There's also the word "håglös". "Lös" meaning 'a lack of', in this context. Which is interesting, since the meaning of håglös is essentially lethargic/unmotivated/lacking of will/indifferent/to have lost the spark. I.e. to lack spirit, will or inner lifeforce in some way.
But is it the "person" that is inseparable, not "body" and soul? The word body seems wrong in this context. Because dead people are mostly burnt so it is not their physical body that go to Hel or Valhall or visit/stays in the grave mound. And even when bodies are buried unburned they of course realised that their bones where still physically in that grave even if the person (But not necessary physical body?) went between different death realms. So isn't the the "person" what Christians call soul? Hugr is person and soul, because bodies can be burned or rut away while the person/soul remains.
We hebben ook het woord in Afrikaans en ik was toe nieuwsgierig over of de etymologieën van de twee woorden, _hugr_ en _geheue_ verbonden zijn. Een klein bezoek aan Wiktionary later en het antwoord is dat beide kommen van hetzelfde oergermaanse werkwoord _*hugjana_, “te denken”.
Imagine growing up in a culture which didn't divide "things of the flesh" (bad) & "things of the Spirit" (good). The context would be totally without the cristian concept of 'sin'. They must have been very well aware that corpses rot pretty quickly though. When you are with a person who dies, it's viscerally apparent that some thing...leaves? They are there, then they aren't, and the body is left like clothes someone stepped out of. I wonder how they squared that.
I'm a bit skeptical of them not having a soul concept at all, yes maybe not a specific term but I'm pretty sure the idea was already present then. Just imagine someone dies and his corps just lays around, how is he supposed to reincarnate or come to Valhalla if he can only do it physically and his body still lays around?
What about the word Odr, supposed to mean a divine inspiration. Inspiration is often seen as a spiritual force or energy that can be gifted to certain people, seidr or galdr.
Weren't pre-Christian Germanic and Norse religions animist? And how does one explain the "inseparable whole person" if they practiced things like cremation? Is it possible that Hugr could mean something like consciousness? Does consciousness exist separately from the body if the body is cremated? These are difficult questions but I'm curious how one explains the contradictions.
Maybe it’s my cultural bias, but I don’t see how this could be. Two examples of this difficulty for me: -Stories of seid-women cursing/attacking enemies while there bodies sit on the seid chair (also, Odhinn traveling while his body lies as if asleep). - Heroes going to Valholl. Regardless of the language used, experienced warriors can see that the physical bodies of those slain in battle don’t disappear and get taken to Asgardr. [EDIT] I see that the above were ...sort of addressed, but I’m not totally sure. I feel like examples of witches are dismissed as being exceptional in regards to the first point above and then sometimes obscured references to particular heroes are taken as normative. I can think of plenty of example of modern people and cultures that consider a dead person to exist simultaneously in the grave and in a conception of an afterlife, with no contradiction whatsoever.
seadawg93 I wonder if the difference here lies in the separation of language and story. The stories were recorded by a Christian in the 12th century, but the language in which they were told is much older and embodies older concepts which were too alien to the modern Christian mind writing them down. So newer ideas about separate souls and bodies entered a much older story in which they didn’t exist?
Paula Unger maybe, I’m just a little skeptical because, for example, warriors see bodies lying on the ground and not being physically escorted to valholl. I’m reminded of an interview I saw with an Indian man once, telling of how the villagers when he grew up had a procession of a statue each year. The statue was ritually out in a lake at the end. While the statue is seen as a living embodiment of the diety, the man was describing how the deity existed beyond the statue. Since the explanation was not part of the official explanation, and wasn’t specifically described that way, the interview questioned wether the villagers themselves saw it this way, or if it was a philosophical overlay from a higher class understanding (standard popular v elite religion idea). The man (who was raised in the village in question) responded, “oh yes, I see what you mean; it does sound like a kind of sophisticated idea, but ...the villagers don’t actually think they are drowning the goddess!” 🤣 I am certainly not saying that I know much about old Norse soul conceptions (or almost anything), I’m just skeptical that the way they are talked about can be used to justify the idea that there was no separate soul (many cultures with concepts of separable souls also talk about them as also/simultaneously embodied).
I dont get why there was no concept of the soul in prechristian north? Bloke dies in battle - Get brought to Valhalla - Body is still on battlefield and later get a warrior burial - Who and what is in Valhalla, who or what is a rotting corpse? The concept of the soul, it seems to me, is pretty clearly implied. Or do we infer that the folks of the good ol days didnt know about rotting flesh and the left over bones in the ground because they did not write about it in the same way as the later Christians? Or do I miss something significant?
danthefrst they definitely knew about the corpse rotting away, all cultures inherently do. I think that there just is a linguistic and metaphorical gap here that may not be addressed. Perhaps there is the belief that the body is a “fetter” used by the person to return, and it wasn’t clearly defined. Remember, the old Norse used very colorful and interpretive language/prose to describe the world and their own deeds, making translation harder for those of us who think far more literally. The same problem arises when interpreting ancient Chinese script as well.
This is the same issue in the Bible. The old jewish tradition had no separate soul, no heaven or hell. It's not even originally a christian idea in the new testament at all. It was added later by influence of Egyptian mysticism as a way to hold even dead people hostage, to make living followers pay the priesthood to improve their status in the afterlife. The ancient greeks also didn't have a separate soul, as testified by people walking out of the underworld after they had died and being physically incarnate. In animistic/shamanic cultures, the dead are often assumed to simply continue being, more or less in their own frame of reference or time frame, and shamanic necromantic practices are used to communicate with them across time, or to send them back to their own time if their influence has become problematic for the living in the current day. This idea is consistent with the "light cones" and "fabric of space-time" in General Relativity, where the future and past always exist, although I'm sure that's not what Albert was concerned about at the time. One of the main points of ancestor veneration is to make sure the dead stay dead. I've put it into a couple proverbs: "Memory is a place where the dead still rule, and all of their wars are... unfinished." and "Nothing will abominate [possess/control] you faster than your own ancestors. It costs them nothing to try, and they think they have the right. They will come at you not as an assault upon the walls, but as flattering from within your own sanctum, growing within you until you can't tell which thoughts are theirs, and which are your own." This is the cause of many long clan-feuds, and much misery among the people -- over issues that are not their own and should have long ago been laid to rest along with the bodies of those who fought over them.
If Norse myth (and presumably other branches of Germanic heathen beliefs) didn't have the concept of body and soul, how come the word "soul" has a proto-germanic origin and cognates of the word in German and Dutch also mean "soul"?
Change of meaning with use over time? 400 years ago in England, stout and sturdy both meant something like ‘stoically courageous’ while the word ‘brave’ meant ‘fine, well done, good’. The change that ‘fair’ made over this time interests me most: it used to mean ‘beautiful’ but now it means ‘blond/blonde’.
Are you serious? This man has studied in depth for literally years and freely gives this knowledge to all, with no expectation of compensation... and you are upset about a short advertisement? 😳😆
@@vikingbraid7515 You misunderstand my statement. I don't have an issue with advertisements. Did I suggest he doesn't have an ad? nope. I suggested that the adds not be so abrupt. I was making a suggestion to improve the content...
I recently learned that my ancestors were viking warriors. My last name, a translation of Gerard, meaning "brave spear", is Viking. I used to hate my last name until I found this out. My cousin told me that a bone specialist of my uncle's noted something in his palm and said it was indicative of viking ancestry. As a woman I cannot confirm it by dna, but the males in my family are not going to give me their blood 😂😂😂 Many of the men in my family are wood workers and they sailed in the Army. I guess some things don't change. When I was born, my great grandfather "Gerard" made me a wooden rocking chair. Even though my Dad and his brothers didnt know their father that well they all built things with wood and we're good at it. That side of my family is devote Christian. I on the other hand have always felt annoyed by the religion. Just being honest. So I was curious about a side of my blood that sold it's soul to Christianity under Rollo 😂
I don't think this topic can be addressed without an examination of the philogical history of psyche (from butterfly) in Greek philosophy, religion and myth; the "Christian or post-Christian" model of the soul is really Greek.
so there are two distinct notions of soul that get mixed into christian theology: the idea of soul as ANIMAting principle vs the role of soul as what allows life after death
I disagree from a “common sense” perspective. They believed in spirits well before Christianity and I highly doubt that they believed their whole physical person went to the afterlife after watching others burn decay or be eaten. All that is implied says that. They also had a belief in various parts of what we call a soul long before Christianity.
You didn't cite any source, any evidence, didn't form any kind of hypothesis. ''Common Sense'' is not always applicable, or always a useful line of inquiry for that matter, and in your case it seems to just be a way to label pre-conceived notions or an inability to distance your thought from modern or at least judeochristian frames of thought.
@@vikingbraid7515 First of all, I didn't have to, as we are commenting under the video of an expert giving his proffesional opinion on the matter, an opinion different from Eric Harris', . Secondly, as Eric Harris is attempting to refute Dr. Jackson Crawford, the weight of proof is on his shoulders, not mine. The only thing I have to do at the moment is to point in the direction of the video. I never claimed to know better, as the first commenter did. So, as I said before, I had no reason or obligation to give proof, but rather simply point out to Eric Harris that he did not support his opinion in any way.
I don’t feel the need to cite any sources if you’re familiar with the topic then you already know why I don’t share his hypothesis. I just merely stated I disagreed and offered information already known or easily found as to why. It’s rather disingenuous to act as though sources need cited in a conversational forum or in general conversation. If you’re on TH-cam viewing videos it is safe to assume you know how to use google. I love this man’s work but I just disagree with him and the information provided doesn’t change my mind. When I say common sense it was in quotations to emphasize the readiness my conclusions can be drawn. It’s fairly common terminology even in professional settings. Also many archeologists and historians draw the same conclusions about how the ancient Norse likely viewed the soul as I have.
I mean its probable they had some conception the sami certainly had concepts of non anthropomorphic spirits which they envisioned inhabited nature as well as a internal spirit and norse had hugr and odr
Am I the only one who can see a connection between the Danish word 'hygge' and hugr? I mean, if hugr can be interpreted to be as subjective as Jackson suggests, I really would like to think that hygge is derived from hugr. Hygge is just as hard to translate, but if I'm right (I don't think I am though) , hygge can be boiled down this: The times we are intending to make good memories for ourselves (preferably in the company of loved ones)
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 88 | คู่เอก "ป้อมเพชร vs อัสลามจอน"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ZqTVVbMgbo/mqdefault.jpg)
Even in the Old Testament the terms "nefesh" and "neshamah" translated as soul and spirit actually don't mean anything more than "life/vitality" and "breathing" respectively.
Same in Finnish with "henki" meaning breath, soul and spirit (spirit as in the spirit of the woods or the spirit of the sauna or something like that). I would imagine henki was used before christian influence on the Finnish language since we also have the word "sielu" which is a lot closer to words from the languages of the countries that effected Finland like many of the Germanic languages.
Chasidah *TheFineArtOfWalkingPoint Fried yeah like nefesh and neshomah mean a lot more than just their literal translations. people in a few hundred years may be confused about our usage of words based on their literal dictionary meaning. neglecting to take context and actual usage into consideration is a massive oversight in terms of understanding another language
"Breath" and "air" are always used in language to describe the soul, such as the Greek words "psyche" and "pneuma," Latin word "spiritus" and "anima," Sanskrit "atman" (cognate with "atmosphere"), etc.
So Helgi was clappin them cheeks even in death. What a legend.
In Norwegian we have the word hugleik. Now another word that ends with leik is kjærleik. Leik mens play. kjær means to like something or someone much, so kjærleik means love. Thus the word hugleik thought + play = fantasy, but in a sentence where the word Leik (play) comes before hug (thought) we are talking about someone "lost" in their own toughs.
In Norwegian hug can mean thought and memory, but also wanting or being attracted to something or someone. So when you can't stop thinking about a particular person, this is something happening in your mind and not in your heart or soul.
This quote I found on Wikipedia: "Vardøgr is a Norwegian word defined as ‘‘premonitory sound or sight of a person before he arrives’’. The word vardøger is probably from Old Norse varðhygi, consisting of the elements vǫrð, "guard, watchman" (akin to "warden") and hugr, "mind" or "soul". Originally, vardøger was considered a fylgja, a sort of guardian spirit.[2]"
The Norwegian dictionary is substantially smaller then the English, but loads of our words have several meanings depending on the context.
And then there's _hygge_ this fuzzy warm feeling you can get when you're resting peacefully in yourself, often in community with people taking good care of each other.
@@rdklkje13 Hug and hygge is probably related to the english word "hugg"
@@jonaseggen2230 English _hug_ also comes from the ON _hugr_ indeed, at least partially. I don’t know of an English word “hugg” (with double g).
@@rdklkje13 Sorry, spelling mistake : )
@@jonaseggen2230 Ah, okay. I was wondering which obscure dictionary you may have pulled an antiquated word out of (-:
Colorado is looking beautiful as ever, I get nostalgic seeing it. I was fortunate enough to live right next to the garden of the gods for about 8 months.
You are a lucky man
Breath is the same as spirit in early Christian/Hebrew as well, as I recall. It's also Chinese "Chi" and Hindu Prana. It's all the same.
Spirit, Latin spiritus = breath
As a Dane.. I actually understand quite a bit of this, without knowing anything about old norse.
I got your edition of The Wanderer's Havamal and I love it!! Read it twice!
It is odd to think about just how much a Platonic conception of a separable spirit has influenced Christianity so much. Perhaps there were Norse christians who stuck to their culture’s thoughts on the body/spirit.
Fascinating. So many modern religions have the concept of a separable soul, it’s refreshing to imagine a culture without it.
If you read the Bible and the Quran closely, they don't have a seperable conception of the soul either
It kind of depends on what you mean by separable, though. In traditional Christian thought, for instance, body and soul are not separate parts of a human being (not like a soul wearing a bodysuit), but more like different dimensions: like there's depth behind the surface of flesh and bone. In Christian thought, death is a tragedy since it rips apart the very essence of human nature: being body and soul - being multidimensional - surface and depth. Sure, it's a separation of body and soul, but in the same way as bodily losing all arms and legs: it's an injury.
It's kind of comparable to how Dr. Crawford explained how the hugr/hugi (btw, a concept still existing in everyday speech in the Nordic languages) may be separable in exceptional circumstances. In traditional Christian thought, death is like a prevalent exceptional circumstance.
The comfort in all this, for Christians, is that one day the body will get resurrected and reunited with the soul, and once again be fully human.
Very interesting and informative (as always). I wonder what the thought process of pre-christian Scandinavians and Germanics were in regards to cremation. We're they releasing the "self" from the bounds of the physical body? Or perhaps it was more for practical reasons versus esoteric reasons.
No reason why it couldn't have developed as a mix of the two. There's certainly reasons for both.
Old Scandinavians believed in reincarnation, but one can’t do that until the flesh of one is completely gone. Therefore you were cremated to speed up reincarnation. For the ones who were evil or bad got thrown in bogs, because the body would take forever to decompose, hence delaying reincarnation.
This makes me wonder about how they would have perceived, a sleep walker. Where the person’s mind is still sleeping, while the soul wanders and the autonomic system is still operating the body through auto pilot.
Love this. Made me think that they actually privileged the inner, mental life over the physical one. One thing which strikes me about the Judaea-Christian idea is that the physical life is the main one and the soul is a bit of a consolation prize. For the ancient Norse, maybe it was the other way around.
I wonders havamal is seriously what I'm looking forward to most this holiday season I cant wait for November to come shut in and read.
I've always thought of "hugi" as "mind" or "consciousness".
"Mind" and "Consciousness" are kind of secular weasel-words. They still convey the notion of a separate "soul" associated with (but not identical to) the body. These terms are basically a holdover of Platonism, which you can see from their etymology (via "psyche") and philosophical history. The old Norse, as I think Crawford was suggesting, had a notion of "thought" but it was linked to/identical with the person as a whole. It wasn't its own "domain".
So I think they had a much more Aristotelian (monistic) than a Platonist (dualistic) view.
Consciousness just means your immediate awareness of yourself and your surroundings. This whole thing started in trying to define the self and specifically who the subject in the sentence "who are you" is. Body purists must just deny that 'they' exist at all. This all causes a lot of philosophical problems. If you believe in 'matter' and soul then you need to explain what each are and how they can interact. If you believe in only matter or that the body is the same as the soul then you need to seriously define what "self" means or simply deny it and explain how it is that matter can think. If you're an idealist who believes there is only spirit and ideas then you can easily dismiss these questions because matter does not exist.
Good morning Dr. Crawford! As always.. Very interesting video :)
Man, probably one of the most interesting videos I've seen from you Dr. What a strange concept to me, an American in 2020 (not even a Christian), that the body and soul are one. Truly appreciate your work in this field.
Great subject, but this is also confusing. The old Norse must have discovered that the entire bodies of warriors did not disappear after they died in battle. Perhaps they just didn't have specialized words to describe that you could go to valhal and leave the body behind.
maybe decomposing was seen as slowly passing over to Hel or a prerequesit for the valkyries to get you? Obviously complete, baseless speculation.
@@Battleschnodder Ibn Fadlan was told by the Rus, "You Arabs are fools because you put the men you love most and the most noble among you in the earth, and the earth and the worms and the insects eat them. But we burn them in the fire in an instant, so that once and without delay they enter paradise... his lord, for love of him, has sent a wind that will bear him hence within the hour." Obviously most pagans didn't have the same exact sentiment if they did bury their dead, but it sounds like what you're suggesting.
Thank you for all the good knowledge Doc.
I appreciate the benefit of your years of study. It is refreshing to hear the truths of history (as well as can be understood) instead of all the fluff and stereotypes of Hollywood.
Thank you for making this knowledge free to those wise enough to seek it, please keep up the good work!
Interestingly in modern Danish, ånd retains both meanings. Ånde = breath / Ånd = spirit
Absolutely fascinating. Thank you.
Thanks for those precious informations explained in a very clear way ! It really helps figuring out the mindset in the time of those old myths.
Always a pleasure Doc! thank you for your work ᚦᚢᚱ ᚢᛁᚴᛁ
Reminds me of when i learned about monism and dualism in philosophy class
Hugr einn þat
er býr hjarta nær
einn er hann sér um sefa;
This makes for a wonderful title page for my newest sketchbook, entitled "Growth"
Also I just ordered The Wanderer's Hávamál. Looking forward to having it next to your Poetic Edda, and Saga of the Volsungs.
Since this is the case, I'd like to understand what I experience in the "paranormal" realm of things. I'm sensitive to things that we can't explain. I've heard things, interacted with them, and caught them on camera. If they aren't "spirits", then what can they be?
Thank you 🙏
To quote The Heretic, "I am alone, but with Myself."
If they had the concept of the body still being in the grave while the person went to Valhalla (or whatever afterlife they were destined for) doesn't that imply a concept of the separation of body and mind? Surely they didn't think that the physical skeleton went to Valhalla and then just suddenly reappeared in the grave if someone opened it? Might they have imagined it sort of like a dream vision or drug induced vision where the body is in one place and the mind is sort of in another?
This was a good one- thanks!
Thank you for the great content!
What I'm about to say may sound controversial to some but I find this a very interesting concept since the idea of the body and soul being separated is a Grego-Roman doctrine that crept into Cristianity during the 4th century. The old and new testament speak of death as being a state of unconsciousness untill a fiscal resurrection of the body. (Aparently not unlike in Norse legand, except the body will be perfect) I will provide some examples below if you are interested.
Some churches, like Seventh Day Adventists, still believe in a fiscal resurrection of the body rather then an immortal soul going straight to heaven, hell, pergatory or roaming the earth.
Ecclesiastes 9:5, 10 - The dead know nothing
Psalm 115:17 - The dead don't prais God
John 11:11 - Death is unconsciousness
Mark 5:39 - Death is unconsciousness
1 Corinthians 15:51-54 - Fiscal Resurrection of the body.
It seems like this concept is even murky today in the West, where we have concepts for a spiritual soul and a mind separate from the body. We take great care of our dead bodies, return those of soldiers and travelers to their homes to be mourned, bury them with their possessions, and often return to cremation urns or grave sites to connect with that individual as if the corpse was still somehow that person. It just FEELS true. Christianity has had a variety of ideas about the connection, from completely separate to connected so strongly that autopsy on the body would bar a soul from entry into Heaven. It sounds like this concept may not be so literal as to think the original body physically goes to the afterlife, but that the spirit itself has a body renewed and refreshed. Just because the original bones are still in the ground, doesn't mean their spirit has to be incorporeal. It may just have sounded ridiculous to the Norse to have a concept like an incorporeal ghost that can walk through walls and float. Everyone has a body, so if it's someone, then it's obviously embodied.
So hugi is similar to the ego or the self, just as understood internally rather than in relation to the rest of existence.
Hugi and ego are similar words, now that you mention it. Latin does not usually express the pronoun specifically, but cogito ergo sum implies that the self that thinks is the essence of our existance. Perhaps Odin has a tripartite soul: himself named Odin, and the two ravens?
The detail you go in to is great. You mentioned that the pre-Christian texts simply state that “you” go to Valhalla etc.
Is it not possible that they’ve understood that “you” are not the same as “this body”.
*as not the same
This could even imply that they believed their form was kept. A form which was no different from their form on Earth.
Some were buried and others were burned, surely they understood that the physical body was destroyed.
No. You have to remember we have 3500 years worth of burial evidence for the people in and around Scandinavia, and none of them until the later import of Middle Eastern, far East, and Latin cultures in the 600s onwards do you starts seeing any sort of burial which suggest anything short of them sending people off into the ground with all their most important material possessions.
These were a people, for thousands of years, where the idea that the voice in their heads, the desires in their meat, and the flesh of their bones, were not in any way separable from the animating breath that signified their lives. And even more telling, they treated the dead as still having some kind of living substance to them which exceeded death, going so far as to protect themselves from the dead who may wish to take back from the living what they had lost.
And as Dr. Crawford was saying, he translated hugr as "you" mostly because that's his educated personal opinion. It's not the final opinion and not the only opinion, but a very good one.
Hugr and Munni were more or less, "thought" and "memory." But they alo meant much more than that. Munn could mean memory, but could also mean "inspiration."
But not inspiration as in, something suddenly occurs to you as one thought outside you body projected into it from elsewhere, but as a literal progression of fate, one step leading to the next.
The idea of "the miraculous," is also alien to the Old Norse. Nothing happens without a preceding and proceeding action. Inspiration in this case is literally fate manifest and unfolding, then continuing. You memories are part of your fate, in essence, and that they are part of your body is also evident, though Othinn is said to fly over the world with Huginn and Munnin each day and night, and worries one may not return more than the other -- which is Othinn maybe intimating he fears the depression that too much knowledge may bring, having said in Havamal, "it's good to be wise, but not so wise, that you can't find a reason to smile."
That suggests thought, memory, inspiration, and even emotional motivation are all wrapped up in these words, and all of them are physically part of your body -- and if your body is destroyed, so are your thoughts and memories and motivations.
The idea that your voice, the voice you are reading this text in (if you read that way) is a physical part of your meat, was what they were trying to convey. And when the body dies, consciousness and memory were non-transferable.
Proof of this is seen in Voluspa when Othinn has to bring a Spa (a kind of seeress) back from the dead in order to have a conversation where he interrogates her corpse -- and after being reanimated, only then is her mind open to him to speak and have a rather catty and sassy rebuke for waking her up. In a Christian or Eastern story, that story would involve a spiritual conjuring and seance, but here you see repeatedly in the Sagas, corpses being the ones you have to go to in order for a daughter to rebuke her father and take his sword to gain the rights to perform some legal act, or a man essentially haunting his wife's vagina by leaving his grave, physically walking to the door, having sex with her, and walking back through his grave to to return to the battlefield in the other world.
The idea that animal bodies and human bodies were hung to dry and parts of them kept as fetish items, like horse penises and human skulls, and unrequited killings often revisited with the revanant corpse of the dead, also goes hand in hand with this, as well as grave desecration being part of rebuking old allegiances and insulting the families of a ruined people. Burial mounds and ship burials gilded to the nines for the rich, and for the poor, even they got their most important items sent with them (and holding onto them by the living was seen as a kind of cursed act,) is meant to suggest there is a unity and continuity between the body and intelligence that can oly ve broken by physically destroying a body.
But, we also have no physical proof that the Norse had drums (other than mention of the Sami) and no mention of the Northern Lights (but we know even though the solar cycle recording in China was very tame in this period, they had to have seen them.) So grains of salt need to be thrown all over. And just because the concept never got written down and isn't apparent in physical evidence, doesn't mean someone somewhere had the thought occur to them that these things may be separate.
I find it interesting to see how the frame of mind of one person influences their translation or conception of something. Someone who has an atheist frame of thought will never see the same interpretation as someone who thinks otherwise. A good example, the warriors grave, where it was always assumed it was a man because the archeologists of that time could not even consider a woman in this role. We are all biased through our personal beliefs/nonbeliefs
High five from also, Colorado.
Thank you very much.
I think it is very interesting and you could ask, why did the greeks talked about the soul ( ψυχή ) and daimon ( δαίμων )
but the norse people didn't ?
why was the soul separated from the body in ancient Greece but not in ancient Scandinavia ?
Wait, doesnt daimōn mean deity/(guardian)spirit?
@@gunjfur8633 It means some kind of deity, mostly as i understand half human half god, as the middle between them.
Maybe it’s simply that physical life was nicer in a Mediterranean country than just outside the Arctic Circle 🥶
Personally I believe it is because the body is seen as an expression of the spirit. Being an expression and creation of it, it is also a part of you in entirety. As long as a body exists there is a portion of the spirit that is still attached to this reality not allowing you to progress further.
@@sk7625 from where did you get that? that is interesting.
Anyways, I'm talking about daimon as described in Plato - The Feast, Aristotle - The Delta Book / The Soul
as seem to describe a deity between man and god.
As someone who is about 75% Irish I feel a great kinship with theNorse because of their presence in Irealand/Scotland and England. (the other 25% is Scots Anglo. What I'd love to see is a seris lime this dealing with Anceint "celts"
I realize it might be more difficult as there aren't the writting text. Yes we have the Hero cycle etc but the were all tranlated by monk and as such heavily Christianized.
Thanks!
Thanks for explaining “Hugi”. That is really helpful. Plus the book looks great!!
I am a little confused about the rest of the video. The Norse appear to be animists and even had contact with the Sami, who were practicing shamanic spirit flight and maybe even spirit possession. Most Animistic cultures have an idea of multiple souls that have different jobs. It is hard to believe that the Norse could teach one another seidr without some idea of multiple souls.
Do we have actual medieval sources describing shamanic spirit flight?
@Chasidah *TheFineArtofWalking: - interesting. I am relating this to the idea of a wandering or sometimes people call it a “free soul”- one that can do spirit flight. Witches seem to be able to do this. Is this a part of the Jewish tradition?
@@anotherelvis We have Odin's body being asleep when he is travelling the world in animal shape. (I'm guessing that's where Game of Thrones got it from.)
@@jytte-hilden Thank you for the answer. I also found a video in which Mathias Nordvig describes Seidr and finnfarar. I don't know which words they use to descibe this experience th-cam.com/video/SE-n8NB67r8/w-d-xo.html
Hm. Lemme rant... The swedish word håg is derived from hugr, meaning something more equal to "will" in my opinion. It's the free thought, the lust for or the like/want of something. Maybe "free will" or simply "personality". Sound very like what we perceive as the "soul" nowdays, but I don't know if they thought so back then... Today "håg" is an old fashioned word and doesn't really have a place in modern language, except in "komma ihåg", meaning to "remember" or "keep in mind". Generally I think most people that even know the definition of the word would translate it to "mind" or "thought". Still seems more connected to the body and mind than something over wordly to me.... Intresting! Just me thinking out loud! ^_^
The word is almost never used in Danish, but apparently it also has several meanings in norwegian. These are related to : Mind, memory and lust.
www.naob.no/ordbok/hu_2
There's also the word "håglös". "Lös" meaning 'a lack of', in this context. Which is interesting, since the meaning of håglös is essentially lethargic/unmotivated/lacking of will/indifferent/to have lost the spark. I.e. to lack spirit, will or inner lifeforce in some way.
Some old Norse beliefs live on as folklore. Tomte, ,Nissas, tTrolls, the belief that sitting on bare ground was deadly.
Hugi = another form of the names Hugo (German, French, Portuguese, Spanish), Ugo (Italian) and Hugh.
But is it the "person" that is inseparable, not "body" and soul? The word body seems wrong in this context. Because dead people are mostly burnt so it is not their physical body that go to Hel or Valhall or visit/stays in the grave mound. And even when bodies are buried unburned they of course realised that their bones where still physically in that grave even if the person (But not necessary physical body?) went between different death realms. So isn't the the "person" what Christians call soul? Hugr is person and soul, because bodies can be burned or rut away while the person/soul remains.
Hugr-- the Dutch word for memory is "geheugen"
We hebben ook het woord in Afrikaans en ik was toe nieuwsgierig over of de etymologieën van de twee woorden, _hugr_ en _geheue_ verbonden zijn. Een klein bezoek aan Wiktionary later en het antwoord is dat beide kommen van hetzelfde oergermaanse werkwoord _*hugjana_, “te denken”.
Hello Jackson, how did you first become interested in Old Norse language and culture?
Imagine growing up in a culture which didn't divide "things of the flesh" (bad) & "things of the Spirit" (good). The context would be totally without the cristian concept of 'sin'. They must have been very well aware that corpses rot pretty quickly though. When you are with a person who dies, it's viscerally apparent that some thing...leaves? They are there, then they aren't, and the body is left like clothes someone stepped out of. I wonder how they squared that.
I'm a bit skeptical of them not having a soul concept at all, yes maybe not a specific term but I'm pretty sure the idea was already present then. Just imagine someone dies and his corps just lays around, how is he supposed to reincarnate or come to Valhalla if he can only do it physically and his body still lays around?
My thoughts also, a concept with no actual term but is however, universally understood.
a valkyrie will come and pick him up when you're not around.
What about the word Odr, supposed to mean a divine inspiration. Inspiration is often seen as a spiritual force or energy that can be gifted to certain people, seidr or galdr.
What of those who were cremated in those times?
Weren't pre-Christian Germanic and Norse religions animist? And how does one explain the "inseparable whole person" if they practiced things like cremation?
Is it possible that Hugr could mean something like consciousness? Does consciousness exist separately from the body if the body is cremated?
These are difficult questions but I'm curious how one explains the contradictions.
Maybe it’s my cultural bias, but I don’t see how this could be. Two examples of this difficulty for me:
-Stories of seid-women cursing/attacking enemies while there bodies sit on the seid chair (also, Odhinn traveling while his body lies as if asleep).
- Heroes going to Valholl. Regardless of the language used, experienced warriors can see that the physical bodies of those slain in battle don’t disappear and get taken to Asgardr.
[EDIT] I see that the above were ...sort of addressed, but I’m not totally sure. I feel like examples of witches are dismissed as being exceptional in regards to the first point above and then sometimes obscured references to particular heroes are taken as normative.
I can think of plenty of example of modern people and cultures that consider a dead person to exist simultaneously in the grave and in a conception of an afterlife, with no contradiction whatsoever.
seadawg93 I wonder if the difference here lies in the separation of language and story. The stories were recorded by a Christian in the 12th century, but the language in which they were told is much older and embodies older concepts which were too alien to the modern Christian mind writing them down. So newer ideas about separate souls and bodies entered a much older story in which they didn’t exist?
Paula Unger maybe, I’m just a little skeptical because, for example, warriors see bodies lying on the ground and not being physically escorted to valholl.
I’m reminded of an interview I saw with an Indian man once, telling of how the villagers when he grew up had a procession of a statue each year. The statue was ritually out in a lake at the end. While the statue is seen as a living embodiment of the diety, the man was describing how the deity existed beyond the statue.
Since the explanation was not part of the official explanation, and wasn’t specifically described that way, the interview questioned wether the villagers themselves saw it this way, or if it was a philosophical overlay from a higher class understanding (standard popular v elite religion idea).
The man (who was raised in the village in question) responded, “oh yes, I see what you mean; it does sound like a kind of sophisticated idea, but ...the villagers don’t actually think they are drowning the goddess!” 🤣
I am certainly not saying that I know much about old Norse soul conceptions (or almost anything), I’m just skeptical that the way they are talked about can be used to justify the idea that there was no separate soul (many cultures with concepts of separable souls also talk about them as also/simultaneously embodied).
@@seadawg93 you two are facinating. Great concepts to think about.
I dont get why there was no concept of the soul in prechristian north?
Bloke dies in battle - Get brought to Valhalla - Body is still on battlefield and later get a warrior burial - Who and what is in Valhalla, who or what is a rotting corpse?
The concept of the soul, it seems to me, is pretty clearly implied. Or do we infer that the folks of the good ol days didnt know about rotting flesh and the left over bones in the ground because they did not write about it in the same way as the later Christians?
Or do I miss something significant?
danthefrst they definitely knew about the corpse rotting away, all cultures inherently do. I think that there just is a linguistic and metaphorical gap here that may not be addressed. Perhaps there is the belief that the body is a “fetter” used by the person to return, and it wasn’t clearly defined. Remember, the old Norse used very colorful and interpretive language/prose to describe the world and their own deeds, making translation harder for those of us who think far more literally. The same problem arises when interpreting ancient Chinese script as well.
This is the same issue in the Bible. The old jewish tradition had no separate soul, no heaven or hell. It's not even originally a christian idea in the new testament at all. It was added later by influence of Egyptian mysticism as a way to hold even dead people hostage, to make living followers pay the priesthood to improve their status in the afterlife. The ancient greeks also didn't have a separate soul, as testified by people walking out of the underworld after they had died and being physically incarnate.
In animistic/shamanic cultures, the dead are often assumed to simply continue being, more or less in their own frame of reference or time frame, and shamanic necromantic practices are used to communicate with them across time, or to send them back to their own time if their influence has become problematic for the living in the current day. This idea is consistent with the "light cones" and "fabric of space-time" in General Relativity, where the future and past always exist, although I'm sure that's not what Albert was concerned about at the time.
One of the main points of ancestor veneration is to make sure the dead stay dead. I've put it into a couple proverbs:
"Memory is a place where the dead still rule, and all of their wars are... unfinished."
and
"Nothing will abominate [possess/control] you faster than your own ancestors. It costs them nothing to try, and they think they have the right. They will come at you not as an assault upon the walls, but as flattering from within your own sanctum, growing within you until you can't tell which thoughts are theirs, and which are your own."
This is the cause of many long clan-feuds, and much misery among the people -- over issues that are not their own and should have long ago been laid to rest along with the bodies of those who fought over them.
Hu is one of the oldest if not the oldest God known to man.
If Norse myth (and presumably other branches of Germanic heathen beliefs) didn't have the concept of body and soul, how come the word "soul" has a proto-germanic origin and cognates of the word in German and Dutch also mean "soul"?
Change of meaning with use over time? 400 years ago in England, stout and sturdy both meant something like ‘stoically courageous’ while the word ‘brave’ meant ‘fine, well done, good’. The change that ‘fair’ made over this time interests me most: it used to mean ‘beautiful’ but now it means ‘blond/blonde’.
OOOf. that ad was really abrupt Dr. Crawford. In the future, I highly suggest having a diagetic lead into to your integrated advertisements.
Are you serious? This man has studied in depth for literally years and freely gives this knowledge to all, with no expectation of compensation... and you are upset about a short advertisement? 😳😆
@@vikingbraid7515 You misunderstand my statement. I don't have an issue with advertisements. Did I suggest he doesn't have an ad? nope. I suggested that the adds not be so abrupt. I was making a suggestion to improve the content...
@Blame_HitReg Fair enough
I recently learned that my ancestors were viking warriors. My last name, a translation of Gerard, meaning "brave spear", is Viking. I used to hate my last name until I found this out.
My cousin told me that a bone specialist of my uncle's noted something in his palm and said it was indicative of viking ancestry.
As a woman I cannot confirm it by dna, but the males in my family are not going to give me their blood 😂😂😂
Many of the men in my family are wood workers and they sailed in the Army. I guess some things don't change.
When I was born, my great grandfather "Gerard" made me a wooden rocking chair. Even though my Dad and his brothers didnt know their father that well they all built things with wood and we're good at it.
That side of my family is devote Christian. I on the other hand have always felt annoyed by the religion. Just being honest.
So I was curious about a side of my blood that sold it's soul to Christianity under Rollo 😂
Norse witches used astral projection. Ha!
I don't think this topic can be addressed without an examination of the philogical history of psyche (from butterfly) in Greek philosophy, religion and myth; the "Christian or post-Christian" model of the soul is really Greek.
While the Latin/Egyptian/Jewish tradition develops out of the metaphor of breath
so there are two distinct notions of soul that get mixed into christian theology: the idea of soul as ANIMAting principle vs the role of soul as what allows life after death
I disagree from a “common sense” perspective. They believed in spirits well before Christianity and I highly doubt that they believed their whole physical person went to the afterlife after watching others burn decay or be eaten. All that is implied says that. They also had a belief in various parts of what we call a soul long before Christianity.
You didn't cite any source, any evidence, didn't form any kind of hypothesis. ''Common Sense'' is not always applicable, or always a useful line of inquiry for that matter, and in your case it seems to just be a way to label pre-conceived notions or an inability to distance your thought from modern or at least judeochristian frames of thought.
Meh, neither did you.
@@vikingbraid7515 First of all, I didn't have to, as we are commenting under the video of an expert giving his proffesional opinion on the matter, an opinion different from Eric Harris', . Secondly, as Eric Harris is attempting to refute Dr. Jackson Crawford, the weight of proof is on his shoulders, not mine. The only thing I have to do at the moment is to point in the direction of the video. I never claimed to know better, as the first commenter did. So, as I said before, I had no reason or obligation to give proof, but rather simply point out to Eric Harris that he did not support his opinion in any way.
I don’t feel the need to cite any sources if you’re familiar with the topic then you already know why I don’t share his hypothesis. I just merely stated I disagreed and offered information already known or easily found as to why. It’s rather disingenuous to act as though sources need cited in a conversational forum or in general conversation. If you’re on TH-cam viewing videos it is safe to assume you know how to use google. I love this man’s work but I just disagree with him and the information provided doesn’t change my mind. When I say common sense it was in quotations to emphasize the readiness my conclusions can be drawn. It’s fairly common terminology even in professional settings. Also many archeologists and historians draw the same conclusions about how the ancient Norse likely viewed the soul as I have.
I mean its probable they had some conception the sami certainly had concepts of non anthropomorphic spirits which they envisioned inhabited nature as well as a internal spirit and norse had hugr and odr
Am I the only one who can see a connection between the Danish word 'hygge' and hugr?
I mean, if hugr can be interpreted to be as subjective as Jackson suggests, I really would like to think that hygge is derived from hugr.
Hygge is just as hard to translate, but if I'm right (I don't think I am though) , hygge can be boiled down this:
The times we are intending to make good memories for ourselves (preferably in the company of loved ones)
So you are saying ghosts only haunt cemetaries at night because they spend their days in Valhall. Thanks for the clearification.